On May 25, 5:46 am, Sebastian 'lunar' Wiesner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [ PurpleServerMonkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ] > > > Would you use D-Bus or a more traditional IPC method such as sockets? > > Although D-Bus is relatively new it looks interesting, just not sure > > it would work well in this kind of project. > > DBus is not really intended for private communication between processes of > the same application, but more for intercommunication between different > applications. If the IPC interface of your backend daemons is intended to > be used by other applications, DBus is the right choice, otherwise I would > choose something different. > > The reason is, that DBus doesn't know about applications. It exposes all > objects registered on the bus to every DBus client on the system and so > makes you application-private API available to the public (and spams the > bus with lots of generally useless objects ;) ). > > In case your IPC interface is application private, a custom IPC protocol > (probably using XML RPC over unix sockets) is better suited. > > Moreover you should make your choice dependent on the type of data you > transmit. Both DBus and XML-RPC wrap calls into XML messages, which is > terribly inefficient for large binary data. > > -- > Freedom is always the freedom of dissenters. > (Rosa Luxemburg)
Thanks Sebastian, Your comments make a lot of sense. I was thinking of creating a custom session channel and using that for my purposes but as you mentioned it's not very secure and I do want to keep the server to daemon traffic private, the server has an XML-RPC interface with a public API. Will definitely look at using a different IPC mechanism for this part of the project. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
